The Spiral of Silence: Linking Individual and Society Through Communication

2 Feb. 2010
19:169:002
Kata Welsh
Reaction Paper
The Spiral of Silence: Linking Individual and Society Through Communication
In the case of the individual versus the mass majority, discrepancy arises as to why the individual is not able to express their unique freedoms, as well as different methods as to how this can be achieved. In their review of this unanswered dilemma, “The Spiral of Silence: Linking Individual and Society Through Communication,” Salmon and Moh cover Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann’s model, ‘the spiral of silence” as well as other specific views into public opinion. Her model is finally contended against other American models to display the subjectivity one has to an issue based on their worldview.
Salmon and Moh describe Noelle-Neumann’s model as “predicted on the notion that society is a potentially intimidating environment for the individual, a setting in which intense social pressure can be brought to bear on the person who dares to test the boundaries of the crowd” (146). Here they explain how in Noelle-Neumann’s view the media is responsible for setting the agenda for the public and in doing so, deliver a liberal stance on issues, and inevitably sway majority culture. This is achieved due to Noelle-Neumann’s claim that the public is so dependant on the media environment that their constantly promoted and encouraged ideas have highly influential effects on public opinion. Broken down, this model is reviewed through multiple lenses, primarily being the social setting.
Based on her conservative views and German journalistic experience, Noelle-Neumann speculates the basis for her model being that by nature, individuals have an apprehension towards social isolation. Therefore, as the mass media regulates public opinion, little notion is left for contesting the ideas at hand. To this Noelle-Neumann clarifies her definition of public opinion as an adjective, as the opinion of the public that can be expressed publicly, not necessarily the views truly representative of the masses. She sees this concept in two versions, the static and the dynamic. Static portraying the individual’s reluctance to express his views with an unfavorable majority, but willingness to confide with a majority the represents them. Exceptions being only those few ‘hardcores’ who defy majorities regardless, and minorities who see their platform gaining favor in the future. The dynamic version demonstrates that with relatively no opposition from the minority sector, that those ideas will slowly fade resulting in the ‘silencing’ of the minority viewpoint (149).
Salmon and Moh shed light on the legitimacy and study devoted to the spiral-of-silence model throughout the reading. It is mentioned that though much discussion has been had over the model, little testing has actually been compiled due to the difficulty and time consumption it would require to acquire such findings. Other professionals have contested Noelle-Neumann’s theory with findings of their own, however. George Gallup and Saul Forbes Rae took a different, more American, approach to public opinion research. They believed more in the empowerment of the individual and their likelihood to create “upward force from the individual to the ruling elites rather than a downward force from media institutions to the individual” (153).
Through their research Salmon and Moh concluded that theories on public opinion are continually brought back to viewpoint of those analyzing and their individual experiences and norms; “Although the two approaches to public opinion research are quite different in some respects, both are grounded in the ideology of individualism; both models are individual-centric models in the sense that explanations for social phenomena are explained in terms of individual perceptions and behavior” (153).
I tend to agree with the determined findings. Like the reading stated in defense of Gallup and Rae’s theory, “American public opinion polling is predicted upon the democratically inspired ideal of individualism, that is, that an individual is interested, knowledgeable, and rational (not motivated by fear)” (153). I like to see this issue from the standpoint of an American value and to be proud of our individual freedoms and express them accordingly.
According to an abcnews.com poll story however, Noelle-Neumann’s model makes some sense even in modern America. The story reports on the insufficient findings of an automated phone polling system where when asked if they found trust in Fox news and then accordingly if they were Republican, the numbers were much higher than the latest poll of voters registered as Republican. This could be described as a case of the spiral of silence theory. Due to the highly Republican connotation with Fox, after answering yes to whether they trusted Fox news, most probably were hesitant to answer yes to being a Democrat, even if they truly were. In this case it could be said that Noelle-Neumann’s theory actually holds some water.
This reading creates an interesting look at public opinion and how it can be seen from many perspectives. It is important to understand all aspects of an issue before defining an above all method of describing it.